Dataset Information

Chronic rhinosinusitis: a qualitative study of patient views and experiences of current management in primary and secondary care.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

To explore patient views and perspectives of current management of chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) in primary and secondary care.

Design

Semistructured qualitative telephone interviews as part of the MACRO programme (Defining best Management for Adults with Chronic RhinOsinusitis).

Setting

Primary care and secondary care ear, nose and throat outpatient clinics in the UK.

Participants

Twenty-five patients consented to in-depth telephone interviews. Transcribed recordings were managed using NVivo software and analysed using inductive thematic analysis.

Results

CRS has a significant impact on patients' quality of life, affecting their ability to work effectively, their social interactions and daily living. Patients seek help when symptoms become unmanageable, but can become frustrated with the primary care system with difficulties obtaining an appointment, and lack of continuity of care. Patients perceive that general practitioners can be dismissive of CRS symptoms, and patients often prioritise other concerns when they consult. Health system barriers and poor communication can result in delays in accessing appropriate treatment and referral. Adherence to intranasal steroids is a problem and patients are uncertain about correct technique. Nasal irrigation can be time-consuming and difficult for patients to use. Secondary care consultations can appear rushed, and patients would like specialists to take a more 'holistic' approach to their management. Surgery is often considered a temporary solution, appropriate when medical options have been explored.

Conclusions

Patients are frustrated with the management of their CRS, and poor communication can result in delays in receiving appropriate treatment and timely referral. Patients seek better understanding of their condition and guidance to support treatments decisions in light of uncertainties around the different medical and surgical options. Better coordinated care between general practice and specialist settings and consistency of advice has the potential to increase patient satisfaction and improve outcomes.

SUBMITTER: Vennik J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6501991 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesTo explore general practitioner (GP) and ears, nose and throat (ENT) specialist perspectives of current treatment strategies for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) and care pathways through primary and secondary care.DesignSemi-structured qualitative telephone interviews as part of the MACRO programme (Defining best Management for Adults with Chronic Rhinosinusitis) SETTING: Primary care and secondary care ENT outpatient clinics in the UK.ParticipantsTwelve GPs and 9 ENT specialists consented to in-depth telephone interviews. Transcribed recordings were managed using NVivo software and analysed using inductive thematic analysis.Main outcome measuresHealthcare professional views of management options and care pathways for CRS.ResultsGPs describe themselves as confident in recognising CRS, with the exception of assessing nasal polyps. In contrast, specialists report common missed diagnoses (eg, allergy; chronic headache) when patients are referred to ENT clinics, and attribute this to the limited ENT training of GPs. Steroid nasal sprays provide the foundation of treatment in primary care, although local prescribing restrictions can affect treatment choice and poor adherence is perceived to be the causes of inadequate symptom control. Symptom severity, poor response to medical treatment and patient pressure drive referral, although there is uncertainty about optimal timing. Treatment decisions in secondary care are based on disease severity, polyp status, prior medical treatment and patient choice, but there is major uncertainty about the place of longer courses of antibiotics and the use of oral steroids. Surgery is regarded as an important treatment option for patients with severe symptoms or with nasal polyps, although timing of surgery remains unclear, and the uncertainty about net long-term benefits of surgery makes balancing of benefits and risks more difficult.ConclusionsClinicians are uncertain about best management of patients with CRS in both primary and secondary care and practice is varied. An integrated care pathway for CRS is needed to improve patient management and timely referral.

Project description:BACKGROUND:As of 2015, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) pays for chronic care management (CCM) services for Medicare beneficiaries with two or more chronic conditions. CMS requires eligible providers to first obtain patients' verbal (and, prior to 2017, written) consent, to ensure that patients who participate in CCM services understand their rights and agree to any applicable cost sharing. CCM providers must also enhance patients' access to continuous and coordinated care, including ongoing care management. OBJECTIVE:To understand patients' perceptions of the consent process, their reasons for choosing to participate, and their experiences receiving CCM services. DESIGN:Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews with Medicare beneficiaries who had two or more CCM claims submitted by an eligible provider. Beneficiaries were selected from a sampling frame of Medicare claims submitted between January and September 2015. KEY RESULTS:Most patients reported no concerns about being asked to participate in CCM. The majority of patients had secondary insurance (or Medicaid) that covered any coinsurance for CCM and therefore could not say with certainty whether they would participate if they had to pay for CCM services out-of-pocket. Reasons for participating included having insurance that covered the copay and peace of mind about having access to the CCM team. Patients reported multiple benefits of participating in CCM services, including better access to their primary care team, improved continuity of care, and improved care coordination. Most patients reported no downside to participating in CCM services, although some felt they were relatively healthy and questioned whether they needed CCM services. CONCLUSIONS:These findings on patients' experiences participating in CCM services during the first 9 months of the policy's implementation can help providers and policymakers understand their perceived benefits and unintended consequences. Our findings also have implications for providers when approaching patients about CCM services.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:To explore clinicians' views and experiences of caring for postnatal women who had hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP), awareness of relevant National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance to inform their postnatal management, the extent to which NICE guidance was implemented, barriers and facilitators to implementation and how care could be enhanced to support women's future health. DESIGN:A qualitative study using semistructured interviews. Thematic analysis was used for coding and theme generation. SETTING:Four National Health Service maternity units and three general practice clinics in South-East and South-West London. PARTICIPANTS:A maximum variation, purposive sample of 20 clinicians with experience of providing postnatal care to women following HDP. RESULTS:Four main themes were generated: variation in knowledge and clinical practice; communication and education; provision of care; locus of responsibility for care. Perceived barriers to implementation of NICE guidance included lack of postnatal care plans and pathways, poor continuity of care, poor antihypertensive medication management, uncertainty around responsibility for postnatal care and women's lack of awareness of the importance of postnatal follow-up for their future health. Some clinicians considered that women were discharged from inpatient care too soon, as primary care clinicians did not have specialist knowledge of HDP management. Most clinicians acknowledged the need for better planning, communication and coordination of care across health settings. CONCLUSIONS:Evidence of longer term consequences for women's health following HDP is accumulating, with potential for NICE guidance to support better outcomes for women if implemented. Clinicians responsible for postnatal care following HDP should ensure that they are familiar with relevant NICE guidance, able to implement recommendations and involve women in decisions about ongoing care and why this is important. The continued low priority and resources allocated to postnatal services will continue to promote missed opportunities to improve outcomes for women, their infants and families.

Project description:AimsTo understand current experiences of vital signs monitoring of patients and clinical staff on a surgical ward, and views on the introduction of wearable ambulatory monitoring into the general ward environment.DesignQualitative study.MethodsSemi-structured interviews using topic guides were conducted with 15 patients and 15 nurses on a surgical ward between July 2018 and August 2019. The concept of ambulatory wearable devices for clinical monitoring was introduced at the end of the interview.ResultsThree interconnected themes were identified. Vital sign data as evidence for escalation, examined nurses' use of data to support escalation of care and the implications for patients perceived to be deteriorating who have not reached the threshold for escalation. The second theme, Trustworthiness of vital sign data, described nurses' practice of using manual measurements to recheck or confirm automated vital signs readings when concerned. The final theme, finding a balance between continuous and intermittent monitoring, both patients and nurses agreed that although continuous monitoring may improve safety and reassurance, these needed to be balanced with multiple limitations. Factors to be considered included noise pollution, comfort, and impact on patient mobility and independence. Introduction of the concept of ambulatory wearable devices was viewed positively by both groups as offering solutions to some of the issues identified with traditional monitoring. However, most agreed that this would not be suitable for all patients and should not replace direct nurse/patient contact.ConclusionBoth patients and staff identified the benefits of continuous monitoring to improve patient safety but, due to limitations, use should be carefully considered and patient-centred.ImpactFeedback from nurses and patients suggests there is scope for ambulatory monitoring systems to be integrated into the hospital environment; however, both groups emphasized these should not add more noise to the ward nor replace direct nursing contact.